# Robinhood Chain liquidity — X 热门讨论 (2026-09-20 19:24 UTC)
## @100y_eth (100y) · 09-20 11:02 · ♥97 ↻10 💬12 A lot of people are misreading the SEC’s new Innovation Exemption for tokenized stocks.
The market seems to be treating this as a blanket green light for anything related to “tokenized equities.”
It isn’t. The SEC’s exemption is much narrower.
The framework allows
- qualifying Tokenized Securities Venues (TSVs) to facilitate trading of tokenized NMS stocks through permissioned AMMs without registering as traditional exchanges.
- Certain liquidity providers can also receive conditional relief from dealer registration.
But the key is what actually counts as a “tokenized NMS stock.” The SEC basically recognizes two relevant models:
1. Issuer-native tokenization
- The company itself, or someone acting on its behalf, tokenizes the actual stock. - Think of a transfer agent recording the actual shares onchain. - The token Itself is the security, not a wrapper that merely tracks it.
2. Third-party custodial tokenization
- A third party holds the underlying stock within the traditional securities system and tokenizes the investor’s ownership interest / security entitlement. - Again, the important part is that the token holder must receive the same rights and privileges as a holder of the equivalent traditional stock. - That explicitly includes things like dividends and voting rights.
What does NOT qualify? → Synthetic exposure.
If a third party issues its own note, derivative, tracker certificate, security-based swap, etc. whose value simply tracks AAPL or NVDA, that instrument is not a “tokenized NMS stock” under this exemption.
This distinction matters because the market reaction has been much broader than the actual SEC framework. Anything vaguely connected to tokenized stocks or onchain trading got bid.
$BP, $ONDO, $HYPE, $LIT and other adjacent names were swept into the narrative, even though their exposure to the exemption is very different.
$ONDO at least has a legitimate connection: Ondo has been moving toward custodial tokenization structures where underlying securities remain within regulated custody while corresponding onchain tokens represent rights tied to those securities.
But HYPE or LIT equity perps? Those are derivatives. They are not what the SEC just exempted.
And this brings us to Backpack.
$BP rallied hard as the market started viewing Backpack as one of the obvious winners from tokenized U.S. equities.
The common thesis seems to be:
“Backpack tokens are redeemable 1:1 for real shares, therefore they are real-equity tokens, therefore the SEC exemption directly benefits Backpack.”
That skips an important legal distinction. Backpack itself describes the two forms very clearly:
Traditional Backpack securities: → UCC Article 8 security entitlement
Backpack tokens on Solana: → “Tokenized claim” → Claim on an SPV holding the underlying assets
Those are NOT the same legal instrument. When you withdraw a traditional Backpack stock position onchain, you are not simply moving the existing Article 8 security entitlement onto Solana.
The security entitlement is converted into a different tokenized instrument.
That token can later be redeemed 1:1 through Backpack Securities and converted back into the corresponding traditional security entitlement.
This is actually a meaningful improvement over many existing stock-token structures.
xStocks, for example, are bearer debt instruments / tracker certificates backed 1:1 by underlying shares.
Robinhood’s Classic Stock Tokens are derivatives against Robinhood Europe and explicitly do not give holders ownership rights in the underlying stock.
Backpack goes further because its token can be redeemed 1:1 into an actual traditional share position / security entitlement.
But redeemability ≠ the token itself being the underlying equity.
And that distinction matters for the SEC exemption. The SEC does not merely require 1:1 backing or 1:1 redemption.
A tokenized NMS stock traded under the exemption must provide the holder the same rights and privileges as the corresponding traditional stock, including voting rights.
Backpack’s current documentation describes the Solana token as a “tokenized claim” designed to maintain economic equivalence with the underlying security.
It does not describe that token itself as an Article 8 security entitlement or as carrying the full shareholder rights required by the SEC framework.
So I would not classify Backpack’s current stock token structure as a direct beneficiary of the Innovation Exemption.
Could Backpack build a compliant structure around the exemption later? Absolutely. But that is different from saying its existing tokens already fit it.
The infrastructure that is much more directly aligned with what the SEC just described looks more like:
- @SuperstateInc: issuer-native shares recorded onchain through a registered transfer-agent model. - @Securitize: issuer-sponsored tokenized shares and transfer-agent infrastructure. - @Figure: blockchain-native registered public equity. - @The_DTCC: tokenization of DTC-custodied securities with identical legal and ownership rights. - @DinariGlobal: custodial tokenized equities designed to preserve the rights of the underlying securities. - @Ondo: moving toward custodial tokenization models tied more directly to securities held inside the regulated custody chain.
I’m writing this because I’ve seen a lot of confusion in the community about what the exemption actually covers and which existing products legally fit that definition today.
Either way, the SEC’s latest announcement is undeniably a major positive for the tokenized equity ecosystem as a whole. https://x.com/100y_eth/status/2101627953121817088
## @0xSammy (0xSammy) · 09-20 17:30 · ♥75 ↻5 💬19 This could get pretty insane!
Standard wants to become the "liquidity engine" for Robinhood’s stock markets
If it executes, this extends well beyond the current $STANDARD protocol + could attract SIGNIFICANTLY larger institutional players
There's also some pretty interesting implications...
1) What we know: Standard explicitly intends to fund and coordinate stock-token liquidity
Its manifesto says it will create + approve markets, seed liquidity, coordinate external capital and return trading fees to the reserve
The intention is to build a capital base that supports multiple markets
If those positions generate profits, retained earnings could fund further deployments
Standard’s published reserve snapshot shows roughly $14M across reserve vaults + protocol-owned liquidity
That includes locked STANDARD liquidity, so the entire amount is not available for stock-market deployment
The significant development is where the protocol wants to earn its revenue... thank god for a return to fundamentals (while still tied to memes)!
Funding stock-token markets could give Standard income from trading activity across the wider RH ecosystem, reducing its dependence on activity around its own token
2) This could strengthen an advantage that competing chains would find difficult to replicate
Robinhood brings stock-token issuance infra, its brand + an established wallet
A deeper onchain liquidity network could make those assets more useful across trading, lending + portfolio applications
Issuing a token is only part of the job... Traders also need enough inventory and capital on both sides of the market to execute meaningful orders without substantial price impact
Other chains already have tokenized equities, like xStocks, pre-Stocks etc. but RH’s potential advantage is the combination of distribution, stock access, liquidity + apps developing together (eg. on top of STANDARD??)
If better execution attracts more trading, and profitable trading finances deeper markets, that advantage could compound BLOODY quick
A competing chain would need to attract the users, inventory + capital behind that activity
3) How this impacts other RH protocols
Existing RH protocols could become both beneficiaries AND competitors
i) Launchpads such as Pons & Long could benefit where their markets depend on stock tokens supported by deeper underlying pools
Buying the stock needed to enter a meme/stock pair could become cheaper, although the meme pair would still need sufficient liquidity itself
ii) DEXs + aggregators could route trades through markets Standard funds
iii) Liquidity managers could potentially manage positions or bring additional capital alongside the reserve
There would also be competition over deposits, trading fees and which markets receive funding
Existing treasury and liquidity protocols would need to demonstrate where they add value through execution, distribution or risk mgmt.
The ecosystem gains most if Standard attracts fresh capital and supports additional activity
Moving the same capital between existing pools would deliver a smaller benefit
4) ALPHA: The reservoir could support another generation of apps
i) An index product could rebalance stock-token portfolios against deeper markets
ii) A lending protocol could use those markets to liquidate collateral more efficiently
iii) Options/perps platforms and market makers could use them to hedge exposure
iv) AI agents could execute portfolio strategies across the same pools, adding another source of trading demand
These are potential applications, NOT announced Standard integrations
They would still require their own contracts, pricing systems + risk controls
The attraction for builders is access to usable markets without having to recruit every liquidity provider themselves
For Standard, applications using its funded markets could generate fees that help replenish the reserve
I’m watching for the first actual deployments, their returns after costs, & how those earnings benefit $STANDARD holders
That will show whether the reservoir can become a lasting source of liquidity for RH
This is probably one (if not THE) most interesting protocol emerging, that could entice a fresh bout of institutional capital into this mini RWA bull
Time to start paying attention! > 引用 @standard_rsv: The first mandate was to issue and defend a sovereign asset with its own monetary policy.
The Standard Reserve introduces the second mandate, to drive and dictate flows of liquidity.
Powered by STANDARD.
https://t.co/AwkaIWiR7P https://t.co/fS4DQexFk5 https://x.com/0xSammy/status/2101725638981734864
## @SonicEcosystem (Sonic Eco) · 09-20 07:11 · ♥73 ↻10 💬6 Sonic Sunday Digest https://x.com/SonicEcosystem/status/2101569893393154393